Wednesday 8 June 2011 11.33 EDT
First published on Wednesday 8 June 2011 11.33 EDT

In the runup to the royal wedding we were repeatedly presented with an image of William Wales and Kate Middleton as the "modern royals". The media and "royal sources" alike presented them as just a normal young couple and, as such, part of a new generation of royals who would usher in an age of renewal for the monarchy. A sign of their new approach to royalty was that they had no domestic staff at their cottage in Anglesey, and it was officially announced that they would not be employing any after their marriage either. But this carefully constructed image of William and Kate as the progressive face of the monarchy has been compromised by the news that they are advertising for a housekeeper and dresser to serve them in their new home of Kensington Palace. The mask of normality has slipped.

[This update was inserted on 10 June 2011: Following publication of this commentary, the couple's press secretary has asked the Guardian to make clear that the couple are seeking one housekeeper-cleaner, who may be either full- or part-time. See footnote.]

It had all been going so well for the royal PR machine. Recast in the mould of the purportedly low-cost, down-to-earth "bicycling monarchies" of northern Europe, the couple had been distanced from the damaging stories of royal profligacy past: Charles with his personal staff of 150, and an aide to squeeze toothpaste on to his toothbrush for him; Andrew's valet carting his 6ft ironing board around the world as the prince travelled as UK trade ambassador. Everything about the royal wedding was also designed to suggest their essential "modernness", and perhaps even a little hipness, from Kate not promising to "obey" in her vows (though Diana also did this), to the couple driving away from Buckingham Palace in a chic Aston Martin convertible, complete with "Just Wed" numberplate.

But away from the carefully choreographed presentation of the wedding, just what are the "modern" qualities that the couple have displayed? As someone of the same age, modern is the last word I associate with William and Kate. Both are prematurely middle-aged in their appearance (I'm yet to be convinced that Kate is the inheritor of Diana's fashion icon status, as is so often asserted), and we know nothing about the personalities behind the bland exterior. In an age when everyone can express their opinion on everything to a worldwide online audience, we don't have the faintest idea what their values are. What are their political views? What music do they like? What did they think of the Britain's Got Talent final? We just don't know. Their facelessness is not only unsatisfying, but jarring in a world where individuality is so prized. In the end, William is a young man walking into a cushy job in the family business, while Kate is a woman of 29 who has never had a proper job at all. There is very little here for anyone, particularly the young, to relate to, let alone respect.

The wedding itself showed us what we are really dealing with here. This was purely about securing heirs and shoring up the hereditary principle. It was about continuity, not change. Kate being given her mother-in-law's engagement ring could hardly make the point more starkly that William and Kate are just part of the unchanging pattern that defines monarchy. As the patsies in this sordid arrangement, this couple are about as anti-modern as can be imagined. They are willingly accepting that one of their children will be head of state simply through accident of birth – something that defies every principle of modern democracy. If William himself is intending to become our head of state without referring to the will of the British people, he has little grasp of the sort of values that most deem to be fundamental – fairness and justice. It's little wonder that since the announcement of the wedding in November the supporter base of Republic, an organisation I've volunteered for, has more than doubled.

Ultimately, there is nothing modern about a hereditary head of state and there is no modern kind of monarchy. Monarchy is always the same – that is its point – and to a younger generation facing bleak economic prospects, the narrative of William and Kate being a modernising force as they go on to employ personal staff rings hollow indeed.

• This article was amended on 8 and 10 June 2011. The original said that William and Kate were planning to hire four staff for Kensington Palace; this was amended on 8 June to two, as above. The article was updated on 10 June to include the response inserted above from the couple's press secretary, who added that a reference later in the story to the Prince of Wales having an aide to squeeze his toothpaste was untrue. An item on this will appear soon in the Guardian's corrections & clarifications column.